• RECLAME (THE LOSS OF RUSSIA, I)
THE BACK IS TURNED
In naming Fokine as choreographer of "The Great Sacrifice" in 1910, Roerich made it a point that "we three"-Fokine, Stravinsky, and himself-"are all equally ablaze with this scene and have decided to work together." 1 So much a part of the game plan was Fokine that when he and Diaghilev quarreled over money at the end of the 1910 Paris season, Stravinsky became alarmed at the fate of his project. He wrote Roerich from La Baute on 12 July 1910:
Now matters have so conjoined that Diaghilev and Fokine seem to have broken fonnally. I want to keep out of it altogether. Diaghilev was tactless enough to say that the question of Fokine's [contracted] participation in "The Great Sacrifice" can be resolved very simply-just pay him off and that's that. But meanwhile Diaghilev hasn't even had the notion to inquire whether you and I will want to work with anyone else. He thinks that if he cannot work it out with Fokine then he (Diaghilev) will work with [Alexander Alexeyevich] Gorsky [1871-1924, longtime ballet master of the Bolshoy Theater, Moscow], of whom I had never even heard before. For all I know Gorsky's a genius, but I don't think Diaghilev could be that indift"erent to the prospect of losing Fokine. 2
When the dispute failed to get settled, Stravinsky decided, astonishingly enough, that he would remain loyal to Fokine rather than Diaghilev. He wrote to Benois in November: "Has Diaghilev made up yet with Fokine?-That is, have they come to terms? This is a very important question, for if yes, then 'The Great
1. "Balct khudozhnika N. K. Rcrikha," Peterlmrgs/utytt!JllUbt, no. 2JS (211August1910); quoted in Krasovskaya, Russkiy btiktniy telltr 1:429.
2. Vcrshinina (ed.), "Pis'ma Stravinskogo Rcrikhu," sS-S9.
Sacrifice' will be Diaghilev's, but if no, then it will go to Telyakovsky (the intendant of the Imperial Theaters in St. Petersburg], which is altogether not so good!"3
That is indeed something to imagine-The Rite at the Mariyinsky Theater, stronghold of The Sleeping Bellllty and The Nutmu:lter! That Stravinsky could have contemplated the idea, even as a reluctant second choice, shows to what extent he still thought of himself as a Russian composer writing for a Russian audience. Even after The Firebird he was still very much "within the walls" of his musical upbringing.
Petrushlta changed all that. The incredible lionizing Stravinsky experienced in Paris changed his attitude toward Russia, toward Fokine, and most of all, toward his own place in the scheme of things. By the middle of 1911 he was fed up with his hitherto hero-worshipped collaborator. "If you only knew what incredible efforts and unpleasantness the production of Petrushlta cost Benois and me because of that bull-headed, despotic, and obtuse Fokine!" he wrote to Vladimir RimskyKorsakov shortly after the premiere. 4 By the next March he was writing his mother, of all people, a veritable dissertation contra Fokine. The way he peppered his prose even here with pompous Gallicisms, by no means all of them contributing any special nuance of meaning, shows more vividly than the content itself the way his environment had begun to influence him. When it came to matters esthctic, Stravinsky had begun thinking in French. "I consider Fokine .finished as an artist," he railed. "It's all just hllhiletl [skill], from which there's no salvation!" Fokine could only "arrange," not "create," whereas
arranging things that were not meant for the stage was never our but [aim)-it was just something forced on us by necessity. The choreographic literature was too poor-so we[!], who had dreams ofa renaissance of"movement" as a plastic art, had to content ourselves at first with remakes-Sylphida (Chopin), C"""'11lll (Schumann), Cllop4m (everyone), Shihmuslule (N. Rimsky-Korsakov), etc., etc. I look upon this era of remakes as a necessary evil, a stage at which it would be unthinkable to remain. One must (or rather, one wishes to) create new forms, something that evil, grasping, if gifted Fokine has never dreamed of. 5
Stravinsky's "we" is priceless. Who was he parroting-Diaghilev (already promoting Nijinsky as choreographic "creator") or (more likely) Benois? Still, in March 1912 he was still calling Fokine his collaborator, however reluctantly: "The only unpleasant thing" about the upcoming production of The Rite, he wrote to his mother, "is that it will have to be done by Fokine."" A letter to Benois, written
3. I..etttr of 3 Novmibcr 1910; in IStrSM:449. .f.. I..etttr of July 1911; in IStrSM:462. s. Letter of 17 Match 1912; in IStrSM:467-611. 6. Ibid., 467.
(970) 13 • RliCLAME (THE LOSS OF RUSSIA, I)
nine days later, reveals that the chief reason The Rite had to be postponed until the 1913 season was that Fokine was too busy with Dllf'hnis MUl Chloe. 7
In the end, what Stravinsky had dreaded came as a stroke of good fortune. DRfJhnis, which opened on 8 June 1912, was Fokine's last ballet for Diaghilev. The choreographer did go back to Telyakovsky for a while, but without The Rite. Paris was now irrevocably Stravinsky's base; neither the Russian stage nor the prospect of writing for Russian audiences attracted him. When Chaliapin tried to interest Stravinsky in a collaboration with Gorky on an opera about Vasiliy Buslayev, a Novgorod epic hero like Sadko, he got nowhere. 8
But then, the Gorky project had involved an opera. The first sign of Stravinsky's overt estrangement from the milieu in which he had been reared involved the charged issue of opera versus ballet, on which Rimsky-Korsakov, as we have seen, entertained somewhat dogmatic and intransigent views. Unsurprisingly, the Rimsky-Korsakov clan viewed Stravinsky's new peer group with suspicion. Things came to something of a head-the first of many-when Stravinsky returned to Russia after the triumph of Petrushka and received a stem letter from Vladimir Rimsky-Korsakov, acting as a sort of family spokesman. The letter itself has not survived, but its contents may be easily deduced from Stravinsky's response, a massive rebuttal amounting to a veritable essay. In the most explicit terms, Stravinsky cast his lot with the Diaghilev venture and with its csthetic outlook-and, by implication, against that of the Rimsky-Korsakov heirs, to say nothing of his own father's legacy. Having named Benois as his mentor, he proceeded to give what amounted to a pithy precis of the latter's 1908 "Colloquy on Ballet." More ominously, he dared take a critical view of his former teacher's attitudes.
This letter was Igor Stravinsky's declaration of independence. Although couched in terms of endearment (its very length and vehemence testifying to Stravinsky's wish to persuade rather than alienate his antagonists), it was a gauntlet. The inevitable breach was under way.
Lengthy though it is, the letter demands citation practically in full, not only for the reason just given but also because it was Stravinsky's only extended proftssion de foi from the period of his early maturity. Indeed, it is the only major esthetic pronouncement Stravinsky ever made that was written neither through an intermediary nor as part of a public relations effort. The early part of the letter makes ref-
7. Letter of 26 March 1912; in Vershinina (ed.), "Pis'ma Stravinskogo Rcrikhu," 8. Sec Cllaliapin's lc:ttcr to Gorky from Milan, 2s March 1912: "I've bcc:n racking my brains about a composer fur you! Glazunov will hardly bestir himself to write. Rachmaninoff, it seems to me, hasn't the temperament for it-he wouldn't take to Buslaycv. 1hcrc is a certain young composer-the son of the former artist Stravinsky. This young man has already written a thing or rwo, including, among other things, a ballet entitled PetnuhU. This ballet was given with enormous success in Paris last year. rm thinking of putting him in touch with you-first, of course, I'll put out a feeler and try to find out how well equipped this young man might be to take on something like Buslaycv. The young fi:llow is now in Monte Carlo. I'll drop him a line and ask him, if he can, to come sec me in Milan" (Groshcva [ed.], Sbtll:Y'fPin 1:m).
THE BACK IS TUR.NED (971)
ercnce to two specific Diaghilev "crimes" that had aroused the Rimsky-Korsakovs' indignation: the 1909 euop.tm--in which Arcnsky's score had been replaced by a "salade russc" (as Nouvd sneeringly put it) 9 that included some music from Rimsky-Korsakov's Mltula.--and the Bakst-Fokine Shlhhw.ade of 1910, which, by adapting Rimsky-Korsakov's score (minus the third movement) to a new and unforeseen scenario, had raised fundamental questions of artistic, and even legal, propricty. 10 Stravinsky answered these charges very much as a spokesman for the offending party.
Ustilug, 8121 July 19n
Dear Volodya,
Forgive me in advance for the incoherence of this letter. I am very agitated by yours, which I Was very happy to receive, but whose contents saddened me as much or more. It's not a matter of your attacks on Diaghilev-to that we're all accustomed, and it's no longer as sensitive a matter as it used to be. It's a much more serious matter that you raise-the thing we all serve together with Diaghilev, namely, the Ballet. But before I get to this, I cannot let the matter of Diaghilev go by altogether. I have said already more than once that there arc deeds of Diaghilev's of which I cannot approve, like, for instance, the musical mishmash that goes by the name of Cllop4m. I say this to everyone and I've said it to him more than once. But I should make it clear that it is the mixture of various authors' styles that I don't like. It's a failure from the musical standpoint. I would even rather have Arcnsky's worthless and stupid music all by itsc1£ I have no objection in principle, as long as the music is good (and has integrity) and the choreographic rcali7.ation shows talent. It docs not offend my artistic sensibilities, which (I would like to suppose) arc not in a state of decay. As regards an individual instance (like Sheherttude), where the subject of the choreographic composition docs not correspond to the subject (if! may put it so) with which Nikolai Andrcycvich prefaced the symphony, the situation is not really any dif.. fcrcnt. The main thing here is not the subject, but the divine spectacle, which transports you utterly into the atmosphere of Shehmwule's stupendous music. The only thing I regret is that not all four movements have been staged. This I told Diaghilev at the time, and it still disturbs me. Nor am I at all in agrccmcnt with Diaghilev in his overly blithe attitude toward cuts, just as I am not in agrccmcnt with [Eduard]
9. Sec Grigoricv, Dilt/Jhiln Blrllet, 8. 10. A typcscri{>t draft for Memories tmtl reproduced in P&D (pl. I facing p. 14+), in· duded thc following sentence: " but while [Mme .Rimsky-Korsakov] attackea [Diaghilev's] tion ofSheheTrlutle she was delighted at the same time to receive very handsome royalties from tt." The sentence was deleted in all editions of the published book. R.imsky-Korsakov's widow was only being Joyal to her husband's views. A letter from the composer to his friend the Moscow Mtclicr S. P. Bcfanovsky (8 January 1908) records his indignant reasons for avoiding the pcrforrnanccs of Isadora Duncan: "Presumably she is very graceful, a splendid mime, Botticelli neck, cte.; but what repels me in her is that she foists her art upon ... musicll compositions which arc dear to my heart and do not at all need her company, and whose authon had not counted upon it. How chagrined I should be ifl lcamcd that Miss Duncan dances and mimically explains, for instance, my SheheTrlutle, Antm; or Easter Overture! When [miming] foisrs itself unbidden upon music, it only harms the latter by diverting attention from it" (Appendix to My Musiall Lifo, +46). All in not so &r fiom what a later Stravinsky might have said!
[972] 13 • lllCLAME (THE LOSS OF RUSSIA, I)
Napravnfk and [Albert] Coates [the Mariyinsky conductors], who this year made a stupendous cut in the scene of the Tatar invasion in Kitezh, and had another cut in mind, which you all, it seems, stood finn against. However, these worthies have never been subjected to such insulting epithets as Diaghilev, who when all is said and done is doing something incomparably higher than they in artistic value-to this I can attest with complete impartiality[!]. Don't think I am just an infatuated yes-man-on the contrary, not a day goes by that I do nor say something, argue, disagree, criticiu. But that's one thing, and recognition of the significance of what is being created is another.
And now we come in earnest to the thing you arc casting doubt upon. I mean the Ballet. Although you say that you arc no enemy of ballet, later you claim that it is a "low form" of scenic art. At this cvcrythfug became clear to me: from this phrase it is clear to me that you simply do not like ballet, and have no interest in it, that you do not attach any great significance to it. I will only say to you that it is just the opposite with me. I love ballet and am more interested in it than in anything else. And this is not just an idle enthusiasm, but a serious and profound enjoyment of scenic spectacle-of the art of animated fonn [z.hitwya pUrstilui]. And I am simply bewildered that you, who so loved the plastic arts, who took such an interest in painting and sculpture (that is, if you have not yet cooled toward them, too), pay so little attention to choreography-the third plastic art-and consider ballet to be a lower form than opera. If a Michelangelo were alive today, I thought, looking at his frescoes in the Sistine Chapel, the only thing his genius would recognize and accept would be the choreography that is being reborn today. Everything clsc that takes place on the stage he would doubtless call a miserable farce. For the only form of scenic art that sets itself, as its cornerstone, the tllsla tf betUlty, and nothing else, is ballet. And the only goal Michelangelo pursued was visible beauty.
I admit I did not expect to hear such a thing from you. It saddens me terribly. It saddens me when people with whom I have been such dose friends, as with you, feel completdy the opposite from me. It is true that I, who am working in the choreographic sphere, have sensed the significance and the necessity of what I am doing (I am not talking only about music but about the entire work as a whole, since I am also the author of Petnuhluis libretto and did this work with the same love as your father, working on his operas), while you, on the one hand, sec nothing but banal and even simply awful operatic productions and ugly ballets (though this year the divine Ownliwll was presented [at the Mariyinsky]) and, on the other, out of your prejudice against Diaghilev, have not budged from your position, and, not recognizing any significance in choreography (for you have said that ballet is lower than opera, while for me all art is equal-there arc not higher and lower arts, there arc different forms of art-if you place one bdow another, it only proves that the plastic arts arc less dear to you than another form of art-or dsc simply a thing you can do without), you dream only of artistic productions of existing operas, not giving any thought to the fact that opera is a spectacle, and a spectacle, at that, with an obligation to be artistic, and, consequently, as such, ought to have its own self-sufficient value-just as captivating gestures and movements in dance-which for some reason you place lower than recitative-arc valuable, when they arc created by the fantasy of a ballet master's talent, just as music, divorced from spectacle [is valuable]. These arc not mere applied arts-it is a union of arts, the one strengthening and supplementing the other.
THE BACK IS TUR.NED [973]
I would understand someone who opposed all unions as such: drama and music-opera, choreography and music-ballet. What can you do, it seems the fdlow likes his art pure: music as music, plastic art as plastic art. But you I cannot understand, my dear, for you the plastic arts, or always have up to now. I can understand Nikolai Andrcyevich, who admitted himself that he was not "sensitive" (so what can you do-if he doesn't feel it, he doesn't feel it) to the plastic arts; but I don't understand in that case why his work took the form of opera, and sometimc:s even ballet, where music is ddiberatdy united with other arts. I think that this came about not out of a lack of understanding or love for other arts, as much as it did from an insufficient immersion in or acquaintance with them. Probably it's the same with you, who have voiced this terrible heresy about "lower forms" (don't be angry at me for my brusque tone-it's not as brusque as it seems). I think that if you would attend the ballet regularly (artistic ballet, of course), you would see that this "lower form" brings you incomparably more artistic joy than any operatic performance (even the operas with your favorite music), a joy I have been experiencing now for over a year and which I would so like to infCct you all with and share with you. It is the joy of discovering a whole new continent. Its development will take lots of work-there's much in store! Well, there you have what I think about ballet, being completely in agreement with Benois and finding nothing wrong with his enthusiasm for ballet. And you are wrong to try to tear me away from Benois's sphere of influence. He is a man of rare refinement, keen to the point of clairvoyance not only with respect to the plastic arts, but also to music. Of all the artists whom by now I have had occasion to see and to meet, he is the most sensitive to music, not to mention the fact that he knows and understands it no less well than an educated professional musician. If his opinions about music are not to your taste, that does not necessarily mean that he is not competent in that area. His assertion that Diaghilev is a singer and composer should be understood simply in terms of his involvement with singing and composition; for he has studied both seriously, though in neither did he show any great abilities. 11
Stravinsky went on to dismiss the critics (excepting Alfred Bruneau) out of hand, to assure Vladimir of Diaghilev's respect for Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov (citing the production in 1911 of the underwater scene from Sad/w), and to make the complaints about Fokine we have already sampled. The letter ends affcctionatcly, as Russian letters do, with a "kiss," and with the exhortation that Vladimir "believe in my sincere friendship." But the letter contains the seeds of the dissolution of that friendship. All at once the astonishing hostility toward Pmwh/uJ that came pouring out of Andrey Rimsky-Korsakov's review becomes comprehensible.
Stravinsky's letters to the Rimsky-Korsakov brothers and to Steinberg maintained a fraternal and confiding tone through the period of The :rute and even (in the case of Steinberg) a little beyond. Increasingly present between the lines, however, is an avuncular tone that must have rankled, and comments on the Russian
n. IStrSM:4j9-62. Addenda made by Stravinsky in the fOrm of foomorcs have been incorporated into the tat.
[974) IJ • R.ECLAME (THE LOSS OF RUSSIA, I)
scene that could only have inspired feelings of inferiority and betrayal. Here, for example, is how Stravinsky informed Andrey of his plan to spend the winter of 1911-12 (when he would compose The Rite) in Switzerland: "You know, my dear, it's better there not just for my family but for me as well. I have to build up my strength of spirit. At home I'd become a regular ncurasthenic." 12 To a September letter from Andrey that was evidently similar to the one from Vladimir which he had answered at such length in July, Stravinsky would spare only a few blithe and patronizing lines in reply: "What could be better and more wonderful than the development of established artistic forms? Only one thing-the creation of new forms. Insofar as I can see, you arc sticking to the former; but since I cannot see you now, I cannot swear that you are not coming round, or perhaps have even come round, to the latter, not in words or thought (of which nobody has enough) but in feeling (of which everyone possesses all he needs). Right or wrong? Surely right! Don't keep yourself from feeling!" 13
By the time Stravinsky wrote to Steinberg with news of the Rite premiere, wishing his old walled-in rival "the same creative ebullience," the irony can hardly be mistaken, especially since more than a year earlier Stravinsky had written Calvocoressi that Steinberg was "plunged totally into academicism," that in his last few letters he "declares that he understands nothing in my most recent compositions," ending with the query, "Is there still a chance of saving him?" 14
The earliest letters from Steinberg in the Stravinsky Archive date from October 1912, so Stravinsky's report to Calvocoressi cannot be directly verified. But the surviving letters amply confirm the esthctic rift that had opened up between them. Early in 1913, for example, Stravinsky wrote to his teacher's son-in-law:
Have you been to [Strauss's opera had premiCred at the Mariyinsky in February 1913 ( o.s.) under Coates, in a translation by Kuzmin.] I've gone twice [in London) and am completely enraptured. This is his best composition. Let them speak of Strauss's perpetual vulgarities-to this I will say only that, in the
12. Letter ofa August 1911; in IStrSM:¢3.
13. Letter of 24 September 1911; in IStrSM:+tS+. In this letter Stravinsky even "assigns" Andrey some reading in the form of scvcra.I articles by the German dramaturg Georg Fuchs (1868-19+9), a strong proponent of choreographic adaprations a la Duncan.
14. Letter of 11 April 1912; in Sc1Corrll:98. The earliest surviving attestation to incipient esthctic contention between Stravinsky and Steinberg is a page bearing an eleven-bar fragment from an early, harmonically somewhat more recondite version of the "Ronde des Princesses" from Firdnnl (now at the State Institute of Theater, Music, and Cinematography in St. Petersburg), copied out in Stravinsky's hand and originally presented to Steinberg with the following friendly yet ironic inscriprion: "Max! Taite this as a souvenir of the ballet which you still look upon (or so it seems to me) as a series of curiosities and 'Kunststilclt's.' Yours, Igor Stravinsky, s XII 1909." The leaf is printed in facsimile and thoroughly described in Abram Klimovitslty, "Ob odnom neizvcstnom avrografc I. Stravinsltogo (It problcmc tvorchcsltogo formirovaniya ltompozitora)," in the yearbook of the Soviet Academy of Sciences, P_,,.,,.;Jtj bl'turi": NUPfye otlmtiyti for 1986 (Leningrad: Naulta, 1987), 227-36. The contention that his musical explorations and innovations were just a bag of"clcvcr tricks" (KunstJtiklre) was the standard anti·StraVinskian line in Russia in the period of the composer's first fame, and what had evidently started out as affectionate joshing among friends eventually reached a very public and wounding pitch with the publication of Andrey Rimsky- Korsaltov's all-out anaclts.
THE BACK IS TURNED [97S)
first place, if you penetrate more deeply into Gcnnan an you'll sec that they all suffer frmt this, and in the second place, time will succeed in smoothing Ova" the lapses of taste that shock contanporarics and will reveal the work in its true light. Strauss's Elelarw is a stupendous piece!!! is
To which Steinberg replied (as Stravinsky must surely have expected) in terms dutifully paraphrased from what he remembered of Rimsky-Korsakov's knecjerk Straussophobia, adding for good measure his impressions of Schoenberg (whom he had met at the time of the PelUllS perfonnance in December 1912):
I heard Elelarw at the dress rehearsal. I completely disagree with your opinion of it. I hate Strauss with all my heart. Your words, that banality is a general trait of German music, I regard as profoundly unjustified and insulting to Gcnnan music, which for all its present insignificance (please don't curse me-Schoenberg is a very nice and talented man) has a transcendently brilliant past. I am completely at a loss to understand how you can be so enthusiastic-it must be hypnmis! 16
As for The Rite itseH: of which Steinberg had heard the first tableau during Stravinsky's visit to St. Petersburg in September 1912, he admitted (in a postscript to his letter of 2 October):
.U I an =II &om m. fim rime.
Stravinsky's letter to Steinberg of 16/29 July 1913 contains another Rite-related postscript: "Just go on playing [it]-Pm sure you'll come to feel this piece with time. Creating it gave me many of my happiest hours. And you I consider to be a man of sensitivity. Just approach this piece with an open heart. I swear to God, it's not that hard."17 This letter has been taken as evidence of Stravinsky's candor and continued open-hearted good will toward the companions of his youth. 18 On the contrary, taken in context it can only be regarded as a taunt. In any case, it was a fruitless plea. Steinberg's response did not come until February 191+, after the Russian in yet another postscript: "About The Rite of Spring I won't write, for about this we have to talk, and talk at length." 19
15. Letter of 17 Fcbruary/2 March 1913; in IStrSM:+71.
16. Letter of 4 April 1913, in the Stravinsky Archive, paraphrased in part in SdCorrl:+411.
17. IStrSM:474.
18. Sec Sinton Karlinsky, "A Pocket Full ofBunacd T;,,,,, Litmlry S"Jlllemmt, s July 1985.
19. Postcard of 18 February 1914, in the Stravinsky Archive.
(976] 13 • (THE LOSS OF RUSSIA, I)
They never had the talk, for with this postcard the Stravinsky-Steinberg correspondence came to an end. The only remaining item from Steinberg in the archive is poignant, a note dashed off in Paris on 16 June 192s: "Igor Fyodorovich! It is extremely deplorable that you have not found time to sec me. I want very much to hear and sec the ballets 'Pulcinella' and 'Chant du Rossignol.' If you can be of assistance in this I would be very glad. I am not in a position to pay the present ticket prices. My address: 7, rue Leclerc, Paris XIV chez Mme St. Choupak (mttro St. Jacques). Best wishes, M. Steinberg."20
With Andrey Rimsky-Korsakov correspondence had broken off earlier; their friendship did not survive Andrey's attack on Petrushlui. 21 As in the case of Steinberg, there was a poignant echo. The Stravinsky Archive preserves a letter from Andrey dated 14 January 1914, in which he apologizes to his old friend for not having sent news earlier about his marriage, and adds the following: "Permit me to make a confession to you: for me, neither our artistic differences nor the distance that separates us have extinguished my feelings of friendship toward you. Perhaps this feeling is by now an illusion, but be assured that I would give much even now for a chance to talk quietly and amicably with you." Stravinsky's "Dear John" reply is a tour de force of diplomatic yet decisive rejection:
Dear Andrey,
We sinccrcly congratulate you and your wife and wish you great and longlasting happiness in your life together. I write you this with all my heart, for I believe in the sincerity of your confession and would also not like to sec our friendship become, as you say, an illusion. I am only afraid that this might happen in spite of us by virtue of the difference in our outlooks in the realm of art or by virtue of the ever more infrequent and remote contact bctwccn us. In any case, neither your venomous and thunderous writings about my works, nor your protests against my "anti-artistic" acts, ought, after your letter (whose sincerity I have no right to doubt) ever alter our good and amicable relations.
I cannot write much, for right now I have something else on my mind-our daughter Milena was born not long ago. The delivery went satisfactorily, but afterwards, for the last twenty days and more, my wife's temperature has been slowly
20. Stravinsky's heartless rcfcrcncc to this episode (M&C:J.4/s6) erroneously places it in the year 192+. His niece Tatyana Yuryevna Stravinskaya. who stayai with the composer's family in Nice from March 192s to February 1926, corroborates the correct date in a letter she wrote home to her parents in Leningrad on 2s July 192s: "Uncle has asked me to write you the rotlowing. While he was in Paris, he was much annoyed by a relative of the Korsakovs'-Stcinbcrg. Uncle docs not like him. At. first Uncle delicately avoided him, then had to resort to hints, but the latter, intentionally or not, failed to understand. Finally Uncle left Paris, but Steinberg would not leave him alone and kept writing letters. In the last of them he infurmcd Uncle that he was going back to Pitcr [the old Russian nickname for St. Peand asked if he had anything to send his brother. Uncle doesn't want to have anything to do with him and asked me to warn you in case he comes to you and gives you his side of the story" (Sttavinskaya. 0 Smmnshms i Jt80 blitiGlrh, 63).
21. The last letter from Stravinsky to his old friend is dated 23 Octobcrls November 1912; sec IStrSM:.f.69.
BACK IS TURNED [977]
but steadily rising. The doctors have diagnosed tuberculosis, aggravated by pleurisy. I am going through a hard time.
I embrace you. Be well, and do let us hear from you if only once in a while.
Yours, Igor Stravinsky2 2
THE METEOR TAKES OFF
The context into which all these letters have to be placed for proper evaluation includes-besides our privileged knowledge, going back to Chapter 6, of Stravinsky's long-breeding envy and Schllllenfreude-a number of public and selfaggrandizing attacks on musical Russia and its eminent representatives that appeared in interviews Stravinsky gave both at home and abroad. These could not have failed to color the way in which the pro forma cordiality of his letters impressed their recipients.
An article on Stravinsky by Emile Vuillermoz, published in Paris early in 1912, was obviously an interview in disguise: it contained a number of inflammatory remarks that could only have originated with the composer. His resentment of the Belyayevets/Conservatory milieu boils over in Vuillermoz's account of the reception accorded the "Funmiry Chant performed at the Belyayev Concerts, much to the despair of Rimsky's official pupils, jealous to see prolonged, as it were from beyond the grave, an artistic intimacy at which they had long taken umbrage." What did Andrey Rimsky-Korsakov or Maximilian Steinberg make of that? Or of this: "Already covertly opposed by certain of his compatriots, the young composer is overjoyed to have found in Paris the aaive support and enlightened dedication that alone are capable of encouraging him effectively on his audacious way."23 Stravinsky took pains to present himself to all his French friends as one who suffered persecution at home. To Calvocoressi he sent a clipping (Fig. 13.1) from the Peterburgsluiya gRUta (3 December 1911) in which Nikolai Bernstein tore mercilessly into a Silori program that included the Russian premiere of a suite from Dll/Jhnis et Chloe, and added in the margin: "And after all this Mr. Bernstein still
22. Stravinsky Archive, "Copie de lcttrcs," 2s. The "anti-artistic acts" by now included Diaghilev's production of Khtmuuhthintl, about which sec the next chapter. The one remaining item from Andrey Rimsky-Korsakov in the archive is an invitation, sent from Leningrad on 15 June 1932, to contribute to a memorial volume for the twenty-fifth anniversary of Nikolai Rimsky-Korsalrov's death (contributions were also solicited from such other Cmigres and foreigners as Glazunov, Albert Coates., Osip Gabrilowitsch, Respighi, Chaliapin, and MontcUX). 'The letter is written in French and opens with the salutation "Cher Maitrc,"though it rather incongruously maintains the familiar second person singular. I tends, cher Maitrc, lcs cordialcs ct rcspcctucuscs salutations de ton fidCle ami ct sincerc admiratcur." 23. "•.• Chtmt fanilm execute aux Concerts BClaidf, au grand dCscspoir des clCvc:s officicls de Rimsky, jaloux de voir sc prolonger avcc lcur maitrc, au dela du tombcau, unc intimitt artistiquc dont ils prcnaicnt dcpuis longtcmps ombragc Deja soumoiscmcnt combattu par ccrtains de scs compatriotcs., le jcunc compositcur SC fClicitc d'avoir trouvC a Paris lcs sculcs sympathies actives ct lcs sculs cnthousiasmes cclairts susceptibles de l'encouragc:r eflicacemcnt dans son audacicusc carriCrc" (Vuillermoz., "Strawinsky," 18, 20).
(978) 13 • RtCLAME (THE LOSS OF RUSSIA, I)
F 1 G • 13 r. Igor Stravinsky, note to Michel Calvocoressi on a review of a Siloti concert by Nikolai Bemshteyn, clipped from the gazeta. The program, mainly Russian premieres, consisted of the "Jena" Symphony, then attributed to Beethoven; Debussy's Rhapsody for Clarinet and Orchestra; a sarabande by Roger-Ducasse; and excerpts from Ravel's Daphnis et Chloe. (The second half featured Alfred Cortot in works by Franck, Chopin, and Friedemann Bach.) The verdict on the modem works: "To judge by the audacity of their artistic methods these authors are geniuses; if, however, their monstrous sonic overloading is taken into account, they are 'cacophonists' devoid of all sense of beauty."
has the nerve to give lectures! It's appalling! What foul style! Just imagine what awaits Petrushka and The Firebird by I. Stravinsky."24
Many of the remarks in Vuillennoz's article were mirrored praaically word for word in an interview Stravinsky gave the London Daily Mail on 13 February 1913: "Russian musical life is at present stagnant. They cannot stand me there. 'Petrushka' was performed at St. Petersburg the same day as here, and I sec the newspapers are now all comparing my work with the smashing of crockery I find my only kindred spirits in France. France possesses in Debussy, Ravel, and Florent Schmitt the foremost creative musicians of the day." It might be thought that this sally was inspired by Andrey Rimsky-Korsakov's attack on Petrushka, but practically the same sentiments can be found in a letter from Stravinsky to Schmitt, written at Ustilug the previous September. Its tone is a heady mixture of justifiable resentment and swaggering self-advertisement:
You realize of course that I am worth nothing tit tdl in my admirable country. Even M. Siloti, who began by promoting me, has ended up declaring that my music has not produced the wished-for success. and so he has recommended that I compose something more digestible
Otherwise the critics annoyed by my success abroad have declared that I have no originality, that I am not at the head of the movement (that's a low blow) but just one of those lined up behind the snob theoriurs, and all this after hearing the works before Pewushlul (which hasn't even been played at a concert in Russia). 25
Just over a week later, Stravinsky was in St. Petersburg en route to Clarens (it would be his last visit to his native city until 1962). During this brief stopover he gave what might well be regarded as the first "typical" Stravinsky interview: arch, startling, slippery as to facts but unerring as to effect. The anonymous reviewer, who signed himself"Teatral" ("Old Theater Hand"), had come to visit Stravinsky at his family apartment, 66 Kryukov Canal. The interview is notable for the frankness with which "Tcatral" seized the bull by the horns on a number of sensitive points relating to Stravinsky's position in Russian musical life, and for the disingenuousness with which Stravinsky described The Rite, launching, as it were, the
u. "Et apres rout M. Bernstein a encore l'audace de faire des confCrencc[s). C'est terrible! Quel sat style. Figurcz vous cc qui attend 'PCtrouchka' ct 'L'oiscau de Fcu' d'I. Strawinski" (Collection of the author). Stravinsky's French at this point was quite insecure, as was even his command of the Roman alphabet. In the hastily scribbled note Russian letters arc inadvertently substituted for Roman. 2s. "Yous savcz bien que je n'ai llllCNne Plllnlr dans moo admirable pays. Monsieur Ziloti meme qui par me protegcr a fini par declarer que ma musiquc n'avait pas le succ:Cs voulu, c'est pour· quoi ii m'a de composer W1C musiquc plus digestible D'autrc part, des critiques cnnuyes par mon suc:cCs en Ctr.mgcr me dCclarent sans originalitC, que je nc suis pas dans la du mouvcment (c'cst malin) mais au contrairc que je me prornenc dans la queue des theories snobistcs, ct tout ccla apres avoir entcndu les oeuvres qui precCdcnt Phrouthb (qui n'a pas CtC jouC encore en Russic mCmc au concert)." The letter is given both in facsimile (first page) and in printed form in Lesure (ed.), Smwinsiy: la awriire nwoplmne, 19.
(980) q • RtCLAME (THE LOSS OF RUSSIA, I)
F 1 G. 13. 2. "'Harum-Scarum,' A New Opera-Ballet-Cacophony by Mr Stravinsky": caricature in the Peterburgs/tayagRUta, no. 276 (10 October 1912), evidently in response to Stravinsky's interview in the same paper two weeks earlier.
durable myth of its "abstract" conception. Most pertinent of all is the haughtiness toward his provincial homeland that suffuses Stravinsky's every word:
A famous Russian composer has come to St. Petersburg. Strange as it seems, he is far more famous abroad than he is at home, in his own country.
I am speaking of I. F. Stravinsky, son of the late singer, who has attracted the attention of all Europe with his music to the ballets The Firebird and Petrushlta, which have been put on by S. P. Diaghilev.
Mr. Stravinsky looks to be a complete youth, modest, even bashful.
Q: How do you explain the fact that your ballets arc not given on the Imperial stage, but only on Diaghilev's?
A: By the fact that the directorate of the Imperial Theaters has never so much as approached me.
As far as The Firebirtl and Panuhlui arc concerned, they arc Diaghilev's property for five years from the date of the first performance. Right now I am composing, together with the painter N. K. Rczin [.tic], a third piece, entitled The Rite of Spring. Like everything I write, this is not a ballet, but simply a fantasia in two parts, like two movements of a symphony. The subject is taken from an indefinite
ancient period. The first part is called The Kiss of the Earth," the second, "The Great Sacrifice."'26
This piece will be staged in Paris, in Gabriel Astruc's new theater on the Champs Elysees. In the construction of this theater, by the way, such outstanding artists as Maurice Denis and (Henri] Bourdclle have taken part. The former painted the ceilings, the latter did all the sculptural adornments. Right now I'm on my way to Switt.crland to finish the work. I have come to St. Petersburg for only a few days, in order to sec a few necessary people. At present, I, along with Diaghilev himself and the rest of the staff of the Diaghilev enterprise, am on vacation. But in November we: will begin touring again, this time including Germany. 27
Q: They say that your Firebird had its greatest success in London.
A: It is indelicate to speak of one's own successes, but the English press was YCl'}' well disposed to me indeed. It's not the kind of ..press success" you get in Paris. French critics arc more frivolous.
Q: Why don't you write operas?
A: I don't know whether you recall, but I did write music to Andersen's famous talc "The Nightingale."' I finished only one part and then got involved with other things. The first scene depicted a forest by the seashore, there was a little landscape music, solos, choruses. I published(!] this piece as a separate number for concert performance. But opera docs not attract me at all. What interests me is choreographic drama, the only form in which I sec any movement forward, without trying to foretell its furore direction. Opera is falsehood pretending to be truth, while I need falsehood that pretends to falsehood. Opera is a competition with namrc. 28
Q: What is your opinion of the artists who have: taken part in your ballets?
A: Both Karsavina [who, incidentally, was living at the time in the apartment immediately above the one in which this interview was being conducted] and Nijinsky were at the very pinnacle of their calling. But besides Karsavina I must mention Nijinskaya. the sister of the famous dtmseur, who has had colossal successes since she left the Imperial stage. Hers is a very great talent; she is an en-
26. Cf. the description given in another St. Petersburg interview, published two days earlier: "I have completed a mysterium entitled 'Le Sacre du Printcmps' There is practically no plot to it, there is only a series of dances or action in dance. How do I conceive of classical ballet at present? In general, I am an adherent of so-called chorcodrama, which is bound to replace the contemporary type of ballet" (Dvinsky, "U Igorya Stravinskogo," s; quoted in Krasovskaya, Russltiy baletnfy telllT 1:432).
27. Stravinsky gave another inrcrviewer a more complete itinerary for a story published on the same day as the one being quoted in full: "No later than this coming winter, his aforcmcntioned ballets [Finbinl and Pemt.shb] will be mounted (in December) in the Kroll Theater in Berlin, following which they will make the rounds of such major German cities as Munich, Dresden, Leipzig, and others, and will then be given in Vienna, Budapest, and, in January, on the stage of the Covent Garden Theater in London" (Peterlnlrgsiiy listB, 27 Scptcmbcr 1912; the scrapbook page that contains this clipping is photographed and inset as an illustration in &pasilions IUlll Developments, following p. '72132). The interviewer goes on to make a reasonable, but in retrospect ironic, sunnisc about The Rite ufSpring: "It will be put on first in Paris, and then, surely, will go from there to other big European stages as well."
28. Cf. the February 1913 Dllily Mtfil interview: "I dislike opera. Music can be married to gesture or to words-not to both without bigamy. That is why the artistic basis of opera is wrong and why Wagner sounds at his best in the concert-room. In any case, opera is a backwater. What operas have been written since 'Parsifal'? Only two that count-'Elcktra' and Debussy's 'Pellcas."' These pronouncements have a particularly ironic ring in view of the opinion Dcrzhanovsky had expressed in print only a month before Stravinsky's last St. Petersburg visit, on the occasion of the Moscow prcmiCrc of the Finbinl suite: "Russian opera, so pitifully muted since the death of Rimsky-Korsakov, must now pin its hopes on Stravinsky" ("Florcstan," "Igor' Stravinskiy [k scgodnyashncmu konurtu]," Utro Rassii, 24 August 1912).
(912] 13 • R£CLAME (THE LOSS OF RUSSIA, I)
chanting ballerina, full worthy of her brother. When she and her brother dance together, everyone else fades [N.B.: At the time of the interview, Nijinska was slated to dance the Chosen One in The Rite, but she had to surrender the role to Maria Piltz when she became pregnant.]
Q: But in St. Petersburg, on the Imperial stage, wasn't she just "one of the crowd"?
A: Yes, they didn't know how to appreciate her in St. Petersburg. That, by the way, is an old story 29
"Modest and bashful," indeed. Stravinsky was playing the role of a Diaghilev press agent on his own behalf, meanwhile throwing down gauntlet after gauntlet, recklessly telling a representative of the Russian musical establishment that Russia was now too small and provincial a pond for a big fish like himself.
An astonishing illustration of Stravinsky's precocious mastery of the art offaire doubt picked up from Diaghilev's consummate example-is the way he managed to tum into one of the most durable legends of his early career what was in actuality a near fiasco he experienced with Petrushka in Vienna during the first week of 1913. The incident has been immortalized in Chroniques de""' vie, where we may still read of the Imperial Opera House Orchestra's "open sabotage at rehearsals and the audible utterance of such coarse remarks as •schmutzige Musik., " 30 Serge Grigoriev's memoirs confirm and amplify the account: in his version, the musicians "declared they would not play it; it should receive no hearing, they said, within the sacred walls of the Vienna Opera! We managed indeed to perform Petrushk11, but only twice; and on each occasion the players duly tried their hand at sabotage."31 It so happened that the incident was reported in the St. Petersburg press on the very day of the Russian (concert) premiere of Petrushka (11/24 January 1913)-evidently a publicity "plant" engineered by or on behalf of Koussevittky. This version of the story, printed immediately after the fact, puts rather a different light on the circumstances that have been related and recycled in the Stravinsky literature now for over half a century:
29. "Tcatral.," "U lwmpozitora I. F. Stravinslwgo," Peterlmrgs/uiyll g11Ut11, '1.7 September 19u. In his last remark Stravinsky alludes to a controversy of long standing, between adherents of the Ballets Russes and those of the Imperial Theaters, as to which organiution could truly claim to represent Russian art. Cf. these remarks by Blanche: "Those who have lived in St. Petersburg, travellers and diplomats, scorn our admiration for this phalanx of creators and interpreters [i.e., the Ballets Russes]. They stop our talk with this sentence: 'If you only knew what went on there, if you went to the opera, if you knew the Imperial Theaters and their companies, you would understand how you are being fooled; you are being given in Paris what Russia would not take.' I know a number of Russians, well respected in their colony and in the diplomatic world, who pale with rage whenever an avalanche of flowers falls at the feet of Karsavina, Nijinsky or Bakst. It would be analogous to the situation if you maintained in St. Petersburg aristocratic circles that our French expositions organil.cd by true connoisseurs and full of Degas, Manet, Renoir and CC7.anne were, far more than the Official Salons, represen· tative of the creative force in France" ("Un bilan arrisrique de 1913," Revue de Pllris, 1December1913; quoted in Bullard, "First Performance," 2:32.0). The idea of this sarcastic passage is that the Ballets Russes were not "representative" of Russian art, but far better than that.
30. An Autobiognlphy, +f..
31. Grigoriev, IJiRehiln Biil/et, 78.
INCIDENT BE1WEEN IlUSSIAN COMPOSEil AND IlOYAL VIENNA OilCHESTilA
Letters have been received from the artists of Diaghilev's troupe with information about a major incident that took place in Vienna between the orchestra of the Royal Opera there and the composer Stravinsky. When rehearsals of Stravinsky's ballet Parushkll began, the composer was dissatisfied with the sonority of the Vienna orchestra, and demanded that its complement be augmented. This demand of Mr. Stravinsky somehow offended the orchestra, who let it be known that they played even Wagner with their usual complement, and that no one had ever said that the Vienna Orchestra sounded bad, and that therefore under no circumstances would they agree to augment it. When Stravinsky continued to insist on his demand, all the players got up and left the rehearsal and refused to play Pmushlui. S. P. Diaghilev managed with difficulty to smooth over the incident, but the augmentation of the orchestra even so was not achieved. 32
Stravinsky seems to have reali7.ed the publicity value of this "incident." He wrote a letter to Florent Schmitt immediately upon his return to Switzerland: "fve just come from Vienna where the 'wonderful' orchestra of the Opemhaus sabotaged my Petrushk11. They said such ugly, dirty music could not be played any better. You cannot imagine the insults and injuries the orchestra inflicted on me." Schmitt promptly had the letter printed. 33 The next month, Stravinsky embroidered shamelessly to his Dllily MJUl interviewer: "And what of Austria? The Viennese arc barbarians. Their orchestral musicians could not play my 'Pctrushka.' They hardly know Debussy there, and they chased Schonberg away to Berlin. Now Schonberg is one of the greatest creative spirits of our era " Schoenberg, Debussy, and me. That Stravinsky could parlay the Vienna story into such a linkage of names is a testimonial to his burgeoning genius for self.. promotion, even as the facts of the incident testify to the progress of the "swelled head" first noted by Mme Siloti back in I9IO. Another linkage of names must have struck the Rimsky-Korsakov epigones as a particular affront, when the RMG came out with a special issue on 20 January I913 devoted to "Contemporary Composers," with feature articles on Nikolai Mcdtner, Igor Stravinsky, and Richard Strauss.
Indeed, to scan the RMG in the period I9IO to 19I+ is to watch Stravinsky take off as if catapulted from his earlier "walled-in" milieu, which continued as before to maintain its plodding round, but only half-heartedly in the absence of its old spiritus rector. Reports ofthe Bclyaycv Concerts continue as before-the same poor attendance, the same listless performances, the same dull "novelties." Eventually
µ. 11/24 January 1913.
33. "farrivc de Vicnnc oo le 'famcux' orchcsttc de l'Opcmhaus a sabott mon Pltnnldllul. On a declare qu'unc aussi laidc ct sale musiquc nc pouvait sc joucr micux. Vous nc vous figura pas lcs ennuis ct lcs injures quc rorchcsttc m'a fait subir" ("Les concerts," F11111U, 21 January 1913; dipping in the Stravinslty Archive, Scrapbook 1912-14).
(984) 13 • RgCLAME (THE LOSS OF RUSSIA, I)
HOMn03l4TOP'bl
F 1 a . 1 3 3 a . A special issue of Russkaya muzika/.'naya
gazeta (20 January 1913): "Contemporary Composers N. Medtner, Igor Stravinsky, Rich. Strauss."
71 '·• ·. a. ' 1•
iiiiiiiiiii
· · · · t l9'l9-•f:..UeunncitaakRA,luepoe1racCa.roeeA»
· . , · CT · . ' ! lfonia•(cK33Ka-6uen.) K« ,._01111. ' . llb111·CUClfYB1.4-I'1.KlPTJUl
Urop1> 11:111e,ieHiJ1: CTpa8J1HcKaro: 1911-12 .u-i
xoropwO '3m•H•• o c<Ub rosop1m 3,ua.my" n·k""' •Hesa6y.10•"' n ti°'¥"'""'"''*' ,.. fiapooy (nptHJC!'Ub?CrBCmlo <f>raHu.iK>) 110.:.:i:i.t- !.rop"a .-3aia.tOJ1HKi1b H uie 3-4 '.forh cf):llfft., •1ro CrpaR111i.:1uro - rHc.::ua Ca1WtCIU13'.11• rn. 2-x• 'l:lCTJln..
CH3.'IZ:la ,y311:ua H 01rl;1111.:ia _<l>p:rn.uiR, :t ll•lTOM·1, · ll\:1P-1. TITui.ut-&!.11t.'h aneppue nothue1n> yike 11 Po.::.:i11.-11ev.l11a11- H"» uapllif\Cl\Oii lff.\lmoAouept 2S iioHa 19lor.re.11e1t1., T:i.K1> KlKl> II e·i.' U:llUll 11111 Hi.' ,:lcl\op;miu J"o.'I081Hla, l(O,TIOKN 110 pHCfllltaM.'k npopote:a 1n. OTC'll!.:TBf; CJWC!ll.,... fi:tK.::r:1 II l'0.!JOlllU13. lia.11crh •llCTpfWKU nocra· H ro pt. CTpamrn· JMeHD ..;.Bnep•wen na,11,i.i"1-clolnD pHil\CKOJli.rea'lpi;.OJa• raro, s:t> ceoe epuH, telet 13 itiua 1911- r.; ·;ip111cra Mapiu11cKoii .'lCKopauiu H Koc:rt>.M.W 'ueuw, Oc:1or:o :Jfr.. A.ael\C. litu)·a. Han.eau•ia CT.1':\BIUI· Cl\3ro (18.t}-11,1112)po.'UtR.:R) iJOJIJI I l'O· .l.1 s;, ( wl;. Hac-:i-io.i.crst:nuo.::r;:. a·l;Ji 3m,l.OC 3H3'1HTCll>• HOC 11&'1Cllie lU:HJ'CC18a uc.:11.:1.11. pax•atpHUTr., · u1rh Hi>•no pO:Rn10, ct.1rpa.1a ue .11.i- TP.:11.Ho<:, •a11awecc•calpi'> po.,1; BO e.1c xo rro ce6t, - HanP?'" Jl().J0.1.0f'O 111111', T3KOC RIUICHJI!' K'b 11 ym\! n:itia:n. aceua KJ)pHH 9 .1rtn· 01ri. yi'.cr,um so. upom;ioin., nycKa.11 3:1111U13CTLJI llrpoli Ha l!Otl!JC' .w:o.10,u.ic 110poa.1·1•. Jh. I:JI02 ro.1y- r.·lm .irD rpuyuice.
8'.Tpi;\l.a aa r?:lHmtct\ U 1au1tTD HropS: ''?' H .•..\. l;rpas1111acaronpe1<pac·
Kopca1>0BL1Mh -,H. ntS 11u 110.lTBCp.)ti.taen. :rry pecrpoi1Ka i•m:11111 w/ Mywpr..:Kift K HOBoxy Crpa- lrllf'. P.-t\op.:.:i11:01'1>-.1yxoa(T:lhOIHfTCJI 80(11pie•HllKHero.
Y'lt"Hffl\OMlh M3.::Tcp:i, OICU:l.RJU:ll'O J :r m•pll;ll't) mn. npaB,lllBOMy, JlckpeH·
1JoJ11.u10e e.1i1111ie u:i Hcyn:uumi1 y 11roporo-nep1toK:.t3CcdO· npo'll!Mi., ·l3 :lTll RpC"4.ll 1:1p:i.R,l!HC1iii1 i !llY M:l.::rcp.::TM!;· npll1-11w..:n1, 'lCTKOC.TH H 8Npa3H• c.:1i•.ta.!l"'l. ! Tc.111>HOCTll p11qmt::i. Xy.tomecraeuuwil npnpo.muc u n.'!:urn•._11Li-1 •1rs.:rs<l 1o1.tru, Im·Brt:MJI hCTa11aB.11usainn. no.en
1111,:.1!1() JJ<1.1·1. ;int: 'l:t1.:1+,nil'!llJ.
•••1:•111•-'• tnorpa •. CTJ11u111c:111ro •n tHH• ,.ntlpy1111111".
pa6lTl.lB3IOTb Jl:J'l> .\la;;rcp:l, 1! }'n\C 81. 1J1:U1Tl:1i11,-co:u:t8<UI HariCTHWlit
r. 011r. m1Urc.'T'f, nepB\'IO Irpam1mJ npcKptirnarn 11 npexp:i.:1,o•y. ApTHCTH· (ue. fJ.73.IUIYIO)lf 11pe.'le..:T11.p1 .1.lfl ro.:1oca 'H.'..:K:U1 "lyTKO;;n. llOlliOJlll.113 np<>HIUl:HfTI> ff cf> ·n. Ha n"cn. llyuurnua' lf¢':1Hflb 11 lla-1 iic:tupe1uncreemw 1n. cxaJOotHNq •ip1. ( •if\aJrl>·
cry r. rlOJl.8.'l'JllOT.::SI'. $3.llT3CTll'ECt:KOCrl
cKe 110:11, •4»iciicp1tep1nl'; (.t1a.11T:ni.11 .1.1n oplil.'- orpa:um. BP of'.ipaaaxl> sen cTpa rlforpcfi:i.llJ.J1:u1 rd•.:11Ht ·(110.:HHlllcU11ail j p•JCK1>m1., <1n!H· n:o1, 11 P:-Kopcaxoea) 11 TaRil(t; 11i1.110T..:J1 ! raamty H Tpem:n1y10 ltl1CT1ury Ct1330'1Karo3noca. p<Ji¥<iHca(•Becna-111om1· 1B·kp111.n10, pi;a1unt·b uo.1'1l'1·•. aa•a•o•·b cBOetO · CTLl'pcx.:t.10 K •PocmmK:l -x.:iw;;ro11cxai111) H pi;au:i. lllJcixaen CrpaBHHCKi1l CBOH ,1raacm11e·
Kpacf n, ai-. l(O'ropo jt{apon TJf 13 OCBOCiO· )f(.1ae11.on'ia"p1> 3.;i:oro l\ama· fic3cxepTHaro, llapCBJf'i3., }{3'r!ClliR n1111.::t11:)ol iti:IUIHI 11'\C,11>, J_ 11cf'lcj1cp. p:±,ly;ii!m.1111 fi,1C..:TK3."lll, - ,.,_'°_ Ht·pK·b• ..:q•1mn·1n. 110 1wfli),1y ce"r:1111:11l1 Top. ucl'I ii ilaain.-ltlpc 1111t.. Ko110-. mc.:Tsa s1, .:c.1111.t P.·l\•1p.::11,11ll:t. Ofrl; fll·t·.:rJ- pnn cp.1'.\f lli.11R..::Tc11: opKccrpb ;«11aen.11.:tW.\la.:TcrcK:1J1 0T.tf;.1i;:;i flrl\t'.:Tro1uJt1:·1. 1ul·rh r>.ic:.,01'·11. H ..:11.1oi1 (raHe1ri. )i(:ip-h.nTHq1pu11., :nu. r::u.:·;, c":nan,, rc11cp.1.1t.11uii .:wiTp·i. uu); 11<>.1u:1.11 ll'hn1 n 3BY'lltj°D •MOJlh6a• •no li1J.1•: 11o:m:u10 n0 n· 1n.-rx<>tt· n\;1p·h·lh111u.1. (n.1a11uoo.: 'lepe.J.yt..'T'l'I: C'lo lllJMh Tf!Op!t:l .\llL'f!rCtftl). 11flo11BJ1eHie 3aUpo•¢cf1epBCpK0311>1 ynr•)'IJL1(JI. :111J1T\'rl, fflillru· u:mHIJX'h ll.1Jh.'Sl'lll>,, 30.lrOTMMH 0.1.110.1apM .1i;iicTJHfTC,1f.ll(• 11 ri. l\JMl!l> (.::nt·p110), n:o.,Oeo.n.:1, •BOJIWe6HWe nepew PjfJ.)' HOlrl. HIJXu.'lKllUIM't. .:••'H:TlHlllll,"1· :momo11>-.JJ.liOH'IClllH.IC 1-'i!.\i! <111i:To awxi. Rr;,icmn., KrYrop1-1• 11 .:v.:r.:i:B.1Htnn. r.1:111- ..,;r;;uu xapa1>.rcp;.1, c.1.+..irat1HJ.re n sa.v-SqaTe,n. Kyro o..:11oay ir .:o.J.epit.;.:mic S.:\!A: m.ecw (11e- Hhl)l'l. srtyfo:ti. 11 <1Ja.11Ta3iefl ueanepnae•oA.
FIG . 1 3. 3 b. RMG (20 Jan. 1913), opening at col. 71: Stravinsky pre-Petrushka interview, based on materials sent to Findeyzen in December 1912. The facsimile autograph is the opening of "Chez Petrouchka," specially written out for the journal by the composer and dated 2/15 December 1912.
PYCCKAH MY3HICUbliAll
even Steinberg had to complain. 34 To Stravinsky's wish that he enjoy the same "creative ebullience" as the author of The Rite of Spring, poor Steinberg replied (from the Rimsky-Korsakov dacha at Lyubensk, which he had inherited), "Our life here is extremely monotonous: there remains only to get on with one's work. In spite of your wish, though, I can't say I'm feeling particularly ebullient."35 Steinberg's letters show to what an extent he had assumed the mantle-indeed, the very daily existence-of his late father-in-law: onerous teaching duties, oppressive family obligations, not to mention his time-consuming labor as Rimsky-Korsakov's literary and musical executor. Having edited the Co1J d'or Suite and the Chronicle of My Musiail Life, he was now hard at work on Rimsky's orchestration treatise. His own creative work was at a near standstill. 36
Meanwhile, practically every issue of the RMG brought news of Stravinskian triumphs and scandals in all the capitals of Europe. Grumblers like Sabaneyev could be depended upon to dismiss them as the antics of a gaudy careerist, a "composer for the modish markctplacc."37 But neither friend nor foe could gainsay the well-turned observation with which Boris Tyuneyev brought the 1913 feature article on modern composers to a close: "Mr. Stravinsky," he wrote, "has begun his career the way most composers would be happy to end theirs." The Petrushka premiere (excerpts under Koussevitzky) was greeted by the RMG with an unabashed puff: "This was undoubtedly an event, for we Russians can now boldly congratulate ourselves on the appearance of a new, outstanding talent" on the world scene. 38 Stravinsky had assumed the role of leadership that had been predicted for Steinberg, and in so doing, he had scaled the Belyayevets walls for good and all. The inevitable backlash may be conveniently traced in the writings of Joseph Wihtol (Jueps Vitols), Rimsky-Korsakov's distinguished Latvian protege and a Belyayevets's Belyayevets, who has already made an occasional appearance in these pages, and who from 1898 to 1914 was the music reviewer of the St. Petersburger Zeitung, the Russian capital's German-language daily. He covered every local
*· "11tc Bclyayevtsi make me just as indignant as they make you," he wrote (4 April 1913) in response: to a letter in which Stravinsky had jccrcd at their failure to observe: the centenary of Dargomizhsky's birth, meanwhile "even as if on purpose programming 'Little-Russian Sketches' by Zolotaryov instead of Dargomizhsky's 'Little-Russian Kuachok,' and 'Variations on a Finnish 11tcmc' by Winkler instead ofDargomizhsky's 'Finnish Fantasy."' He concluded, "Shame on Glazunov, shame in all likelihood even on Lyadov" (Lc:ttcr of 17 February'2 March 1913; in IStrSM:471). "But I don't know what I can do," protested Steinberg. "I have to spare Lyadov's and Glazunov's feelings, after all. Oh, if only they'd sec for themselves! This second concert was simply a disgrace-I can't recall anything like it." Once again Stravinsky was baiting his old rival, rubbing his nose in the contrast between their environments. While he couldn't have cared much by this time about Dargomizhsky's centennial, his let· tcr is an impressive and valuable testimonial to his knowledge of the Russian repertoire he had left behind, even down to such bottom-of-the-barrel fare as Dargoonzhsky's inept and justly neglected orchestral pieces.
3s. Letter of 26 June 1913; in the Stravinsky Archive.
36. Sec letters of 4 April and 18 May 1913 (Stravinsky Archive) in which Steinberg complains, among orhcr things, of having piles of examinations to grade.
37. Sabancycv, "Kontscrt iz proizvcdcniy Stravinskogo."
38. RMG 20, no. s (2 February 191J), col. 136.
THE METEOR TAKES OFF (987)
Stravinsky premiere from the Symphony in E-flat to The Rite of Spring, and the temperature, from write-up to write-up, descended steadily from fervid to arctic. "The Petersburg school, one must hope, will with time be able to point with rightful pride to this its youngest representative," was how Wihtol greeted the symphony in 1908. The Beethoven and Musorgsky orchestrations the nen year were "excellently" done. When it came to The Firebirtl, though, the critic already had his doubts: "So young and already such a know-it-all!" he exclaimed. "Where can Mr. Stravinsky go after this?" When he had his answer he reacted with unmitigated sarcasm: "I do not feel the urge to dilate particularly on The Rite ofSpri"IJ; my sphere of operations is the art of music, and in the presmt instance the most competent critic would be a zookeeper."39
Myaskovsky captured to ironic perfection the spirit in which the denizens of his old milieu were receiving Stravinsky as early as 1911:
One has only to strike up with anyone, but especially with a professional musician, a conversation about I. Stravinsky, and without fail you'll hear: "An uncommon talent for orchestration, astonishing technique, the richest invention, but where's the music?" What kind of nonsense is this! Talent, talent, uncommon, astounding talent, and yet the very thing that provides that talent with its medium is lacking. What is this-incomprehension or disingcnuousncss? We can discount the latter, of course, since one encountcn this opinion not only among people who arc impartial and disinterested, but even among those who arc close to Stravinsky. It's simply a matter of-we cannot say.40
As we shall see, Stravinsky managed eventually to antagonize even Myaskovsky.
THE METEOR CORRALLED
The situation was just the opposite in France, where Stravinsky was welcomed enthusiastically by the organized avant-garde-a faction that, at least in music, hardly existed at all in Russia. For them, Stravinsky was from the moment of his appearance the uncrowned tsar of Russian music, "worthy continuer of the Rimskys and the Balakirevs, who from now on makes the expression 'The Mighty Five' seem insufficient."4 1 Moreover, the social prominence of the backers of the Ballets Russes gave the company's staff genius a social prestige that flattered his innate snobbery, again to a point no musician could hope to achieve in Russia. In previous chapters we have explored Stravinsky's artistic contacts and friendships among Parisian musicians. In this one we shall have a look at his involvement in
39. Vito!, sttri, pirW, 118, 220, 228, 254.
40. Shlil:Shteyn (ed.), materildn 2:24.
41. " ••. Dignc continuatcur des Rimsky ct des Balakircv, ct qui, dcsormais, nous &it apparaitrc injustcmcnt insutlisantc ccttc dCnomination des 'Cinq'" ("Les concerts," Fnw:e, 19 November 1912; clipping in the Stravinsky Archive).
[988) 13 • RgCLAME (THE LOSS OF RUSSIA, I)
Another random document with no related content on Scribd:
